We were recently asked a great question by one of our readers and friendly rivals; "How did you successfully coach two teams last spring with two completely different formations and systems of play?" The questioner was referring to the fact we fielded two U19 nebs teams last spring. The "A" team played a 4-2-3-1 while the "B" team played from a 4-4-2 formation.
The phrase "system of play" is rather a generic one. It is commonly used to define the number of forwards used in a formation. The positional responsibilities of forwards can be different dependent on whether one, two or three forwards are deployed. And there is a trickle down effect to the midfielders, back line and even the goalkeeper. System of play can also apply to the teams general attacking philosophy. Does the team wish to counter attack? Do they seek to play directly? Will the team be more of a build & probe team?
With the personnel available on our "A" team the 4-2-3-1 was an easy choice. Lot's of good center midfielders, speed galore on the wings and a couple of strong, fast, physical forwards who could alternate up top. To be perfectly honest we started the "B" team playing in the same 4-2-3-1 formation for sake of continuity within the program and between the two teams. It quickly became apparent the "B" team lacked the type of forward to effectively run the 4-2-3-1 so I made the decision to switch them to a 4-4-2 where two forwards share the workload and play off one another. However, this did not significantly change our system of play in the broader and general sense of how we wanted to attack opponents.
The single forward in our 4-2-3-1 was responsible for both the initial penetration of a defense and also for being a target player. As such he drew attention from the opponents back line wherever he was positioned in the middle third of the field - usually pushed forward on ball side. One of the three midfielders served as his direct support when he was played as a target. The two forwards employed in the 4-4-2 served the same purpose as they were deployed in a "stack" with one pushed against the opponents backs as a target and the other slightly withdrawn to be in support position of the target. If not caught up in the numerical alignment of formations the actual system of play in the broader sense was basically the same.
The real difference between the 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-2 was found in how we covered defensive width in the defending third. In the former we played as a 5-4-1 defensively while in the latter it often looked more like a 5-3-1-1. Again, subtle differences with the defensive system of playing remaining largely the same.
I think it is important to note the phrase "system of play" as used by the questioner isolated the transitioning phase from defending to attack. That is, with both teams, as we entered the attacking third of the field we attempted to do so with numbers up and little regard to formational alignment. We sought to create and utilize space by manipulating the defense with player movement and ball movement. The only variable of priority concern was whether the opponent man marked or played a zonal defense.
So, my answer to the question is we played the same system from both formations.
To further illustrate this point, the "A" team was capable of playing multiple formations while our system of play never changed. 4-2-3-1 was our preferred choice, but at times we looked to be in a 5-4-1 or a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3 or even 2-3-2-3. The point being, we look at a formation as our defensive set and our system of play as our attacking philosophy which after the initial transition phase from defending to attack is not predicated on a formational alignment so much as it is on space, support and pace.
Welcome to the web home of Conceive Believe Achieve Soccer. We specialize in conducting high school team camps. This website began as a means to promote our camps and keep campers informed of upcoming opportunities. There are now over 650 articles archived here. Use the search function in the right hand column below to find ones on topic for you. You may contact us at coachtjbrown@gmail.com or 567-204-6083 Thanks for visiting!
Thursday
Wednesday
Ted. No, not the movie. Ted, A soccer coach.
I received a call from Ted recently. He was down in the dumps and thinking of getting out of coaching. I had been expecting this, but still wasn't fully prepared to discuss this with Ted. A little background may serve to bring things into focus for the purpose of this article.
I have known Ted for years. He was a very good high school player who went on to play in college. He was hired into a good school system, but one that did not allow first year teachers to coach. They wanted their teachers to get a foundation in the classroom before branching out into extra curricular activities. When the head soccer coach position came open a couple of years later Ted applied and ultimately was awarded the job.
Now, Ted is one of the most enthusiastic people I know. To say he was excited about this opportunity would be an understatement. He knew how he had been coached as a high school athlete and also how he had been coached at the college level. His intentions were to bring what he had learned as a college athlete to the high school level. He wanted to reverse engineer the college athlete and bridge the gap between levels of play. This is a notion I highly applauded as I believe too often high school athletes are under-coached in the sense that too little is asked of or expected from them. Even so, I cautioned Ted to be realistic. I counseled Ted to take stock of where the athletes were and then look to the vision he had for how they could play. In between the starting point and his vision was where all the work would need to take place.
All these grand ideas and an overflowing fountain of practical knowledge Ted wanted to share with the high school players never really came to fruition. Ted came away convinced high school players were incapable of what he was asking of them. In fact, Ted called because he was thinking of resigning from the high school position. He thought maybe he would be better at coaching college athletes. I called B.S. on this entire idea.
Let's back track just a bit. When Ted was contemplating becoming a high school coach and sharing his collegiate experience with younger players I applauded the notion. I also suggested Ted evaluate where the high school athletes were and where he wanted to take them. The process of progressing from point A to point B could then be defined. I think what happened with Ted was he noted what he wanted to change but didn't take into account all of the details of process that would be necessary to effect that change.
Another young high school coach told me last fall that my approach with club athletes would not work with a typical high school team. Again, I called B.S. on this theory. It has worked with a high school team. In fact, a high school team were my original "guinea pigs" for our current coaching methodology and system of play. I took a team that in 11 years had never had a winning season, was a sieve on defense and dominated on offensive by one player and turned them into a regional qualifier behind a strong defense and balanced scoring in our second season.
I did so in part by defining where the program / team / players were while knowing where I wanted to take them. From our starting point we built a foundation in all aspects of the game that allowed the transformation to take place. We worked on changing a losing culture into a winning one while simultaneously implementing gradual changes to how we played the game and most importantly how the game was thought. The critical element to this was empowering the athletes to make mistakes ... and learn from them. We did not pick apart their decision making process that led to mistakes. Rather, we challenged them to think differently, to find alternate solutions to the problems they encounter. And maybe most importantly in this regard was the possibility of redefining the problem or obstacle they encountered to allow for a broader spectrum of solutions to be entertained.
That first year was brutal for me as a coach. We lost games we should not of lost. Or more precisely, we lost games that first year that we easily won the second year. I was confident the transformation would take place while knowing the learning curve would be steep. This is where Ted is at this moment. His season was a difficult one for him. Progress did not come quickly enough. There was resistance to some of the changes he implemented. I don't think Ted realizes how close to a break through he might actually be with this high school team. I encouraged Ted to once again evaluate where the program is and where he wants to take it. Could he identify progress? Then once again identify a process to take the team from current point A to the point B he envisions for them.
When a process breaks down I have found one of the best solutions is to back track a bit. Identify the problem and then identify the problem for the team. Discuss it with the team. Break it down to the smallest detail and begin reconstructing what it is you want them to achieve. Build understanding right along side of technique and tactical application. Give them the small picture - all the little details - so they gain a fuller appreciation of the large picture or grand scheme of things through poise and confidence in the smaller setting.
For my teams, learning patience when playing out of pressure that we might be able to then counter with speed has been a focal point. When I first introduce the idea of being a counter attacking team everyone thinks "win the ball and go!" when there is actually so much more involved if it is to be done effectively and efficiently.
I think Ted is going to give it another go with the high school team. As we talked I could sense Ted beginning to understand he needed to define the process better not only for himself, but for the players as well. The proverbial wheels were churning and enthusiasm seemed to be creeping back in as well. For Ted the process seems back on track with a better appreciation or perhaps a deeper understanding of the necessity to TEACH the process of how to get from point A to point B. I am confident that should Ted stick with it, he will guide the program ever closer to his vision for it.
I have known Ted for years. He was a very good high school player who went on to play in college. He was hired into a good school system, but one that did not allow first year teachers to coach. They wanted their teachers to get a foundation in the classroom before branching out into extra curricular activities. When the head soccer coach position came open a couple of years later Ted applied and ultimately was awarded the job.
Now, Ted is one of the most enthusiastic people I know. To say he was excited about this opportunity would be an understatement. He knew how he had been coached as a high school athlete and also how he had been coached at the college level. His intentions were to bring what he had learned as a college athlete to the high school level. He wanted to reverse engineer the college athlete and bridge the gap between levels of play. This is a notion I highly applauded as I believe too often high school athletes are under-coached in the sense that too little is asked of or expected from them. Even so, I cautioned Ted to be realistic. I counseled Ted to take stock of where the athletes were and then look to the vision he had for how they could play. In between the starting point and his vision was where all the work would need to take place.
All these grand ideas and an overflowing fountain of practical knowledge Ted wanted to share with the high school players never really came to fruition. Ted came away convinced high school players were incapable of what he was asking of them. In fact, Ted called because he was thinking of resigning from the high school position. He thought maybe he would be better at coaching college athletes. I called B.S. on this entire idea.
Let's back track just a bit. When Ted was contemplating becoming a high school coach and sharing his collegiate experience with younger players I applauded the notion. I also suggested Ted evaluate where the high school athletes were and where he wanted to take them. The process of progressing from point A to point B could then be defined. I think what happened with Ted was he noted what he wanted to change but didn't take into account all of the details of process that would be necessary to effect that change.
Another young high school coach told me last fall that my approach with club athletes would not work with a typical high school team. Again, I called B.S. on this theory. It has worked with a high school team. In fact, a high school team were my original "guinea pigs" for our current coaching methodology and system of play. I took a team that in 11 years had never had a winning season, was a sieve on defense and dominated on offensive by one player and turned them into a regional qualifier behind a strong defense and balanced scoring in our second season.
I did so in part by defining where the program / team / players were while knowing where I wanted to take them. From our starting point we built a foundation in all aspects of the game that allowed the transformation to take place. We worked on changing a losing culture into a winning one while simultaneously implementing gradual changes to how we played the game and most importantly how the game was thought. The critical element to this was empowering the athletes to make mistakes ... and learn from them. We did not pick apart their decision making process that led to mistakes. Rather, we challenged them to think differently, to find alternate solutions to the problems they encounter. And maybe most importantly in this regard was the possibility of redefining the problem or obstacle they encountered to allow for a broader spectrum of solutions to be entertained.
That first year was brutal for me as a coach. We lost games we should not of lost. Or more precisely, we lost games that first year that we easily won the second year. I was confident the transformation would take place while knowing the learning curve would be steep. This is where Ted is at this moment. His season was a difficult one for him. Progress did not come quickly enough. There was resistance to some of the changes he implemented. I don't think Ted realizes how close to a break through he might actually be with this high school team. I encouraged Ted to once again evaluate where the program is and where he wants to take it. Could he identify progress? Then once again identify a process to take the team from current point A to the point B he envisions for them.
When a process breaks down I have found one of the best solutions is to back track a bit. Identify the problem and then identify the problem for the team. Discuss it with the team. Break it down to the smallest detail and begin reconstructing what it is you want them to achieve. Build understanding right along side of technique and tactical application. Give them the small picture - all the little details - so they gain a fuller appreciation of the large picture or grand scheme of things through poise and confidence in the smaller setting.
For my teams, learning patience when playing out of pressure that we might be able to then counter with speed has been a focal point. When I first introduce the idea of being a counter attacking team everyone thinks "win the ball and go!" when there is actually so much more involved if it is to be done effectively and efficiently.
I think Ted is going to give it another go with the high school team. As we talked I could sense Ted beginning to understand he needed to define the process better not only for himself, but for the players as well. The proverbial wheels were churning and enthusiasm seemed to be creeping back in as well. For Ted the process seems back on track with a better appreciation or perhaps a deeper understanding of the necessity to TEACH the process of how to get from point A to point B. I am confident that should Ted stick with it, he will guide the program ever closer to his vision for it.
Tuesday
Take Standard Training Exercises and Repurpose them.
I have been reviewing video from past NSCAA convention sessions looking for different ideas. One thing I have noticed is many of the clinicians use generally accepted exercises or drills for their demonstrations. I have no problem with this. In fact, when addressing a coaching audience at a coaching clinic it can be good to utilize activities most might be familiar with to build a foundation from which you can teach to explore other options.
This morning I reviewed a session on Speed of Play and Speed of Thought presented by Ian Barker from the 2014 NSCAA convention. Far be it for me to criticize an established talent like Ian Barker. He presented a solid session working through a progression of activities focusing on combinations and patterns to increase speed of play. In approximately 50 minutes there was marked improvement in the demonstration team.
Now, 50 minutes is a limited amount of time. It would not be realistic to expect every aspect of Pace of Play to be covered in the allotted time. That said, the one thought that kept running through my mind while watching this session is "if all we ever do, is all we've ever done. All we'll ever be is what we've always been." I had been using the same progression of activities with teams for well over a decade. It wasn't until I modified the activities and more importantly the points of emphasis within the activities that my teams made real progress with pace of play.
As you watch the video look for opportunities to make some of the following coaching points or points of emphasis.
1) Know your next play before your first touch on the ball.
* This involves preparing to play the ball.
Off the ball movement
Properly positioning the body to receive the ball
First touch being in the direction of your play or even being your play.
2) Receive across the body whenever possible so the hips remain open to the field and you have options for play.
3) Intentionally engage a defender as the ball carrier to create numbers up situations to exploit.
4) Efficiency and Economy of touches.
5) Ball movement is predicated on player movement.
* Intentional movement to
Create space for a teammate
Into space created by a teammate
To intentionally and purposefully move one or more defenders.
6) Know and utilize the Cues for Combination Passing
7) Possession is not about moving the ball. Possession is about moving opponents so the ball may be moved more easily. We call it manipulating a defender or the defense.
8) Effective Communication. Clear and concise. Give a pass, Give information. Be your teammates eyes when his are focused on the ball.
9) If a teammate is under pressure move towards him to get in his vision and do so at appropriate angles for making / receiving a pass.
10) If a teammate is not under pressure clear the space around him so he make select a defender to engage OR better yet, clear the space around your teammate to intentionally isolate a defender to be engaged by positioning yourself to begin a combination passing sequence.
These are but 10 areas not (specifically) emphasized in the video presentation linked above. It might be taken for granted that players already possess these tools in their tool belts, but in watching the video we see that is not necessarily so. We often refer to items like the 10 listed above as the details of the process. And it is important to remember that success is found in the smallest of details.
Want to learn more? Search this sight for any of the key phrases listed above OR if you want to see this in action, contact us a 567-204-6083 or tbrown@wcoil.com and make arrangements for us to come do a camp for you and your team. Thanks for reading!
This morning I reviewed a session on Speed of Play and Speed of Thought presented by Ian Barker from the 2014 NSCAA convention. Far be it for me to criticize an established talent like Ian Barker. He presented a solid session working through a progression of activities focusing on combinations and patterns to increase speed of play. In approximately 50 minutes there was marked improvement in the demonstration team.
Now, 50 minutes is a limited amount of time. It would not be realistic to expect every aspect of Pace of Play to be covered in the allotted time. That said, the one thought that kept running through my mind while watching this session is "if all we ever do, is all we've ever done. All we'll ever be is what we've always been." I had been using the same progression of activities with teams for well over a decade. It wasn't until I modified the activities and more importantly the points of emphasis within the activities that my teams made real progress with pace of play.
As you watch the video look for opportunities to make some of the following coaching points or points of emphasis.
1) Know your next play before your first touch on the ball.
* This involves preparing to play the ball.
Off the ball movement
Properly positioning the body to receive the ball
First touch being in the direction of your play or even being your play.
2) Receive across the body whenever possible so the hips remain open to the field and you have options for play.
3) Intentionally engage a defender as the ball carrier to create numbers up situations to exploit.
4) Efficiency and Economy of touches.
5) Ball movement is predicated on player movement.
* Intentional movement to
Create space for a teammate
Into space created by a teammate
To intentionally and purposefully move one or more defenders.
6) Know and utilize the Cues for Combination Passing
7) Possession is not about moving the ball. Possession is about moving opponents so the ball may be moved more easily. We call it manipulating a defender or the defense.
8) Effective Communication. Clear and concise. Give a pass, Give information. Be your teammates eyes when his are focused on the ball.
9) If a teammate is under pressure move towards him to get in his vision and do so at appropriate angles for making / receiving a pass.
10) If a teammate is not under pressure clear the space around him so he make select a defender to engage OR better yet, clear the space around your teammate to intentionally isolate a defender to be engaged by positioning yourself to begin a combination passing sequence.
These are but 10 areas not (specifically) emphasized in the video presentation linked above. It might be taken for granted that players already possess these tools in their tool belts, but in watching the video we see that is not necessarily so. We often refer to items like the 10 listed above as the details of the process. And it is important to remember that success is found in the smallest of details.
Want to learn more? Search this sight for any of the key phrases listed above OR if you want to see this in action, contact us a 567-204-6083 or tbrown@wcoil.com and make arrangements for us to come do a camp for you and your team. Thanks for reading!
Monday
By Invitation Only?
Today I wish to share one small secret about youth soccer with you. It is a proven truth with me and I believe it can be for you as well. Let me know what you think.
When I worked with local soccer associations there were always an abundance of players at the U6 and U8 ages. Enough so that in-house leagues could be held at those ages. By U10 and U12 the number of participants were in decline and a league with surrounding communities was needed for matches. By U14 the local associations were down to one team in each gender. Why do so many players leave the youth game?
There are actually a lot of reasons why kids leave the game. Today, I want to discuss one reason only. They do not feel like they belong. They do not feel appreciated, valued, wanted. While I believe this holds true for both genders it might be particularly true of boys. Allow me to illustrate with a story.
For as long as I can remember our club struggled to field quality teams in the U16 through U19 age groups. Some years it was an issue just to secure enough players to field a team let alone a quality side. The club ran the usual publicized tryouts and as a coach I would scout and recruit for the team with only marginal success. Finally in utter exasperation at attempting to field a U15 team I turned to the core group of players and announced "If we are going to have a team, you will need to find players. And the competitive level we will play at will be determined by the players you bring to the team."
BINGO!
With the kids recruiting the players we fielded a full team and a decent side. With each succeeding year we had a larger player pool and played at a higher level of play. The difference was found in the players asking others to join them. Kids who were not inclined to just show up for open tryouts came when they were invited by their peers. Word spread through the player grapevine to the point where we had nearly 50 U19 players last spring. That is simply an unheard of number for rural west-central Ohio. There was competition for roster spots and some ended up self selecting when they realized they would not make the "A" team. We ended up with 38 players overall divided amongst two teams.
When a coach with a rival area club asked how we were getting so many players while they struggled to field a lone age appropriate team my answer was simple - our players reached out to others and asked them to join up. I did absolutely nothing aside from close the deal with a few parents in terms of explaining philosophy, expectations and costs.
And I think it significant enough to point out the players themselves were selective. They did not invite just anyone. If they felt a player would not be a good fit for the program, they did not talk with them about playing together. In fact, more than once they selected what many would consider personality or character over talent.
The result was a tight knit group that strung together a 47-8-5 (?) record with league titles, showcase and tournament championships. All the credit goes to the players making others feel welcomed.
Thinking back to those middle school years I remember how everything around me was constantly changing. From our bodies hitting puberty to who we hung around with. Everyone was seeking places to fit in and even more importantly no one wanted to feel rejected. Remember being afraid to ask a girl to go out with you? Or how about those school dances where everyone hung out along a wall because they were afraid they would make a fool of themselves if they danced? I remember our eldest son being a bit reserved until a girl from our church invited him to join a group that hung out together. That invitation was all it took for him to begin spreading his wings. It gave him confidence in himself knowing he was accepted and wanted as part of that group. It didn't hurt any that the girl was a couple of years older and pretty as well!
I believe our core group of players addressed the insecurities many teen aged boys have when they approached others and asked them to join us. This eliminated the fear of rejection that can be associated with "trying out" and is in general so prevalent in young people.
So what do you think?
Instead of open tryouts would tryouts by invitation only bring out better numbers?
I know it did for us, but are we an isolated example?
When I worked with local soccer associations there were always an abundance of players at the U6 and U8 ages. Enough so that in-house leagues could be held at those ages. By U10 and U12 the number of participants were in decline and a league with surrounding communities was needed for matches. By U14 the local associations were down to one team in each gender. Why do so many players leave the youth game?
There are actually a lot of reasons why kids leave the game. Today, I want to discuss one reason only. They do not feel like they belong. They do not feel appreciated, valued, wanted. While I believe this holds true for both genders it might be particularly true of boys. Allow me to illustrate with a story.
For as long as I can remember our club struggled to field quality teams in the U16 through U19 age groups. Some years it was an issue just to secure enough players to field a team let alone a quality side. The club ran the usual publicized tryouts and as a coach I would scout and recruit for the team with only marginal success. Finally in utter exasperation at attempting to field a U15 team I turned to the core group of players and announced "If we are going to have a team, you will need to find players. And the competitive level we will play at will be determined by the players you bring to the team."
BINGO!
With the kids recruiting the players we fielded a full team and a decent side. With each succeeding year we had a larger player pool and played at a higher level of play. The difference was found in the players asking others to join them. Kids who were not inclined to just show up for open tryouts came when they were invited by their peers. Word spread through the player grapevine to the point where we had nearly 50 U19 players last spring. That is simply an unheard of number for rural west-central Ohio. There was competition for roster spots and some ended up self selecting when they realized they would not make the "A" team. We ended up with 38 players overall divided amongst two teams.
When a coach with a rival area club asked how we were getting so many players while they struggled to field a lone age appropriate team my answer was simple - our players reached out to others and asked them to join up. I did absolutely nothing aside from close the deal with a few parents in terms of explaining philosophy, expectations and costs.
And I think it significant enough to point out the players themselves were selective. They did not invite just anyone. If they felt a player would not be a good fit for the program, they did not talk with them about playing together. In fact, more than once they selected what many would consider personality or character over talent.
The result was a tight knit group that strung together a 47-8-5 (?) record with league titles, showcase and tournament championships. All the credit goes to the players making others feel welcomed.
Thinking back to those middle school years I remember how everything around me was constantly changing. From our bodies hitting puberty to who we hung around with. Everyone was seeking places to fit in and even more importantly no one wanted to feel rejected. Remember being afraid to ask a girl to go out with you? Or how about those school dances where everyone hung out along a wall because they were afraid they would make a fool of themselves if they danced? I remember our eldest son being a bit reserved until a girl from our church invited him to join a group that hung out together. That invitation was all it took for him to begin spreading his wings. It gave him confidence in himself knowing he was accepted and wanted as part of that group. It didn't hurt any that the girl was a couple of years older and pretty as well!
I believe our core group of players addressed the insecurities many teen aged boys have when they approached others and asked them to join us. This eliminated the fear of rejection that can be associated with "trying out" and is in general so prevalent in young people.
So what do you think?
Instead of open tryouts would tryouts by invitation only bring out better numbers?
I know it did for us, but are we an isolated example?
Keep Your Shape vs. Crossing Lines
"Keep your shape" or utterances to that effect are common calls from coaches in youth soccer competitions. Most of the time, especially at younger ages, this implies staying in the teams formational shape; 1-4-3-3 or 1-4-4-2 as examples. In the older age groups the word shape becomes more synonymous with the word support. Support (and balance) takes priority over formational shape as the latter becomes a bit more fluid.
Typically a formation will have three lines; backs, midfielders, forwards. Dependent on how each line is employed there might be what we shall call "sub-lines" within each line. For instance, in a 4-3-3 the midfield might be deployed in a triangle as 2 holding midfielders with an attacking midfielder in front of them. The triangle shape might shift to one holding midfielder and two attacking midfielders but the players manning these positions stay with their "line."
The same is true of the back line where two center backs are often found flanked by two advanced wing backs. In this case, the two advanced wing backs might appear to form a line with the holding midfielder(s), but their roles and responsibilities are still associated with the back line. Similarly if two or more forwards are deployed one might be pushed forward as a target while another is slightly withdrawn.
"Stay in your position" is another call often heard at youth soccer contests. It can mean the same thing as "keep your shape." Often times when I watch youth soccer matches I see two teams in rigid formation moving up and down the pitch in synchronization. A picture of armies of the 1700's facing one another in rank and file across a battlefield comes to mind.
Now, I think shape or more specifically support is a critical element to team defending. The system employed behind the support strives to make an attack(er) predictable and therefore more easily defended. This is sound soccer at any age or competition level.
If predictability of attack is a desired result of properly supported defending, then unpredictability is paramount to effective attacking. This is where crossing lines comes into play.
In review, formations deploy 3 basic lines with possible sub-lines fielded within any or all lines. Backs, midfielders, forwards. When defending these lines define the teams formation. All too often in the youth ranks they also define a teams attacking shape. However, this makes the attack very predictable.
Crossing lines simply means a player moves from one line to or even better through another line. The easiest way to depict this scenario is to picture a wing back moving up the field through the midfield line and into an attacking position abreast of the forward line. The wing defender has crossed lines and therefore fundamentally changed the shape (or formation) that his team will attack in. If the responsibility for crossing lines from back to front in the formation / shape is shared amongst all backs this movement can prove to be unpredictable and extremely disruptive to the opponents maintaining their own shape or support system.
This movement is commonly defined as mobility, the fourth element to the game of soccer. In previous writings we have discussed the first three elements of the game of soccer; penetration, depth and width. It is the mobility used to establish these elements that help define a teams attacking shape and the support within that shape. More precisely it should be mobility between lines that defines a teams attacking shape and manipulates the defending shape of the opponent.
Crossing lines brings a fluidity to the game that rigid deployment in formation shape does not allow for. In military terms it is akin to defending in a castle while an opponent uses speed and mobility to bypass the castle. In soccer terms, crossing lines adds another dimension to a teams ability to create numbers up situations to attack with. Think again of the wing defender. In front of him a midfielder engages a defender. The wing defender moves forward on the flank isolating that defender in a 2 v 1 situation. Now the overlap combination passing sequence might be on or the defender might be set up to execute a wall pass / give and go sequence against. But the real value of mobility and crossing lines might be what is occurring on the backside of the opponents formation where your other wing defender might have freedom to run the flank all the way into the final third. Now, the opponents defense is stressed and under pressure of attack from both on-ball and off-the-ball threats on different fronts.
Crossing lines brings with it an element of danger when the ball is lost. You will find teams that are adept at crossing lines when attacking filling their defensive shape from back to front regardless of originally assigned positions. This is where pressing defenses come into play. Upon losing the ball the nearest three defenders press to either win the ball back or slow the counter attack allowing teammates to reestablish shape behind the ball. Six seconds. That is how long those pressing have to win the ball back. That is also how long teammates have to regain defensive shape behind the ball.
In conclusion, one of the games within the game of soccer is the battle of Keeping your shape vs Crossing lines and the transitional phases of going from one to the other.
Typically a formation will have three lines; backs, midfielders, forwards. Dependent on how each line is employed there might be what we shall call "sub-lines" within each line. For instance, in a 4-3-3 the midfield might be deployed in a triangle as 2 holding midfielders with an attacking midfielder in front of them. The triangle shape might shift to one holding midfielder and two attacking midfielders but the players manning these positions stay with their "line."
The same is true of the back line where two center backs are often found flanked by two advanced wing backs. In this case, the two advanced wing backs might appear to form a line with the holding midfielder(s), but their roles and responsibilities are still associated with the back line. Similarly if two or more forwards are deployed one might be pushed forward as a target while another is slightly withdrawn.
"Stay in your position" is another call often heard at youth soccer contests. It can mean the same thing as "keep your shape." Often times when I watch youth soccer matches I see two teams in rigid formation moving up and down the pitch in synchronization. A picture of armies of the 1700's facing one another in rank and file across a battlefield comes to mind.
Now, I think shape or more specifically support is a critical element to team defending. The system employed behind the support strives to make an attack(er) predictable and therefore more easily defended. This is sound soccer at any age or competition level.
If predictability of attack is a desired result of properly supported defending, then unpredictability is paramount to effective attacking. This is where crossing lines comes into play.
In review, formations deploy 3 basic lines with possible sub-lines fielded within any or all lines. Backs, midfielders, forwards. When defending these lines define the teams formation. All too often in the youth ranks they also define a teams attacking shape. However, this makes the attack very predictable.
Crossing lines simply means a player moves from one line to or even better through another line. The easiest way to depict this scenario is to picture a wing back moving up the field through the midfield line and into an attacking position abreast of the forward line. The wing defender has crossed lines and therefore fundamentally changed the shape (or formation) that his team will attack in. If the responsibility for crossing lines from back to front in the formation / shape is shared amongst all backs this movement can prove to be unpredictable and extremely disruptive to the opponents maintaining their own shape or support system.
This movement is commonly defined as mobility, the fourth element to the game of soccer. In previous writings we have discussed the first three elements of the game of soccer; penetration, depth and width. It is the mobility used to establish these elements that help define a teams attacking shape and the support within that shape. More precisely it should be mobility between lines that defines a teams attacking shape and manipulates the defending shape of the opponent.
Crossing lines brings a fluidity to the game that rigid deployment in formation shape does not allow for. In military terms it is akin to defending in a castle while an opponent uses speed and mobility to bypass the castle. In soccer terms, crossing lines adds another dimension to a teams ability to create numbers up situations to attack with. Think again of the wing defender. In front of him a midfielder engages a defender. The wing defender moves forward on the flank isolating that defender in a 2 v 1 situation. Now the overlap combination passing sequence might be on or the defender might be set up to execute a wall pass / give and go sequence against. But the real value of mobility and crossing lines might be what is occurring on the backside of the opponents formation where your other wing defender might have freedom to run the flank all the way into the final third. Now, the opponents defense is stressed and under pressure of attack from both on-ball and off-the-ball threats on different fronts.
Crossing lines brings with it an element of danger when the ball is lost. You will find teams that are adept at crossing lines when attacking filling their defensive shape from back to front regardless of originally assigned positions. This is where pressing defenses come into play. Upon losing the ball the nearest three defenders press to either win the ball back or slow the counter attack allowing teammates to reestablish shape behind the ball. Six seconds. That is how long those pressing have to win the ball back. That is also how long teammates have to regain defensive shape behind the ball.
In conclusion, one of the games within the game of soccer is the battle of Keeping your shape vs Crossing lines and the transitional phases of going from one to the other.
Labels:
attacking,
backs,
Conceive Believe Achieve Soccer,
Conceive Believe Achieve Soccer Camps,
crossing lines,
Defending,
Depth,
formation,
forwards,
midfielders,
mobility,
penetration,
Shape,
support,
Width
Friday
Random Thoughts on a Cold Winters Morning.
* Parents spend a LOT of money sending their kids to soccer camps. I sometimes wonder if that money wouldn't be better spent sending their child's coaches to a coaching camp?
* A school with a brilliant academic reputation routinely struggles to play smart in any team sport?
* If we prize athletes who are creative problem solvers why do we seek to limit the decisions we allow them to make?
* Shooter! I hear this called out in girls basketball all the time in regards to a particular player. Shouldn't all players be considered shooters?
* Coaches have a responsibility to prepare a player for success. Then place them in positions where a reasonable expectation for success exists.
* Next Play!
* Soccer referees need a mentoring program. Something more than read the material, do the on-line stuff, sit in a class reviewing the material, take a test and Voila! you're a soccer referee! There should be a program to gain practical experience under the supervision and tutelage of experienced referees.
* Surround yourself with people who will challenge you. So many administrators and coaches view people as smart or smarter than they are as threats. The most successful coaching staffs are filled to the brim with past, present and future head coaches.
* Communication is the life line of relationships. Healthy productive relationships are the foundation successful teams are built upon. Perhaps even more so than talent.
* Mistakes? Certainly don't go looking for them, but when you make one? Embrace it. Own it. Learn from it! Move on from it smarter and more experienced than you were before!
* A school with a brilliant academic reputation routinely struggles to play smart in any team sport?
* If we prize athletes who are creative problem solvers why do we seek to limit the decisions we allow them to make?
* Shooter! I hear this called out in girls basketball all the time in regards to a particular player. Shouldn't all players be considered shooters?
* Coaches have a responsibility to prepare a player for success. Then place them in positions where a reasonable expectation for success exists.
* Next Play!
* Soccer referees need a mentoring program. Something more than read the material, do the on-line stuff, sit in a class reviewing the material, take a test and Voila! you're a soccer referee! There should be a program to gain practical experience under the supervision and tutelage of experienced referees.
* Surround yourself with people who will challenge you. So many administrators and coaches view people as smart or smarter than they are as threats. The most successful coaching staffs are filled to the brim with past, present and future head coaches.
* Communication is the life line of relationships. Healthy productive relationships are the foundation successful teams are built upon. Perhaps even more so than talent.
* Mistakes? Certainly don't go looking for them, but when you make one? Embrace it. Own it. Learn from it! Move on from it smarter and more experienced than you were before!
Wednesday
Passion for the Task
Just because you are a leader
in one aspect of your life
doesn't mean you are a leader
in every aspect of your life
Passion for the task
is a key ingredient of Leadership
I recall a high school soccer player who was among the very best team captains I have seen in nearly 4 decades of participation in team sports. Everyone assumed he was headed for greatness in life based on the leadership abilities he displayed in a soccer team environment. The age old saying "to assume makes an ass out of u and me" comes to mind. While the former player is making a positive impact on society it is not in the role of a soccer coach as many, myself included and perhaps especially so, anticipated it would be. He's dabbled a bit in coaching off and on for a few years, but always seemed (to me) reluctant to do so. I suppose he caved to expectations for him to be a coach when the passion to be one wasn't present. And that one word, passion, is what all great leaders in their field have.
I have seen this throughout the years in the context of captains for teams. Players with great passion for their sport and their team are often overlooked in favor of athletes who display leadership ability elsewhere in their lives. In recent years, I had a young man on our club soccer team who I suspected would make a good captain. The trouble was, he was on a team comprised of players over half of whom were captains for their respective high school teams. This particular player was among those who were not a captain for his high school team. Although he was largely overshadowed as a leader on the club team, his light did shine through on occasion. It took fielding two club teams last spring and placing him on the second squad for his leadership skills to come to the fore and really blossom. As a senior, he should have been one of the three captains for his high school team.
That leads into the final point I wish to make today - A title does not make someone a leader. The title of head coach did not make Ryan a good leader as a coach nor did the lack of a title prevent Matthew from being a leader on his high school team. Leadership is an action word, but only when actions are passion driven can effective leadership be a positive difference maker for a team. Ryan obviously had a passion for playing the game but this has yet to transform itself into a passion for coaching the game. In Matthew's case, he simply needed the correct environment to allow the embers of his passion to flame to life.
As powerful an influence as leadership can be, ineffective leadership in any endeavor can actually be a hindrance to achieving to potential. So, select your captains carefully. Select your assistant coach carefully. If you are an athletic director or club director of coaching, select the head coach carefully. Select for any leadership position carefully with passion for the task being a primary consideration.
As powerful an influence as leadership can be, ineffective leadership in any endeavor can actually be a hindrance to achieving to potential. So, select your captains carefully. Select your assistant coach carefully. If you are an athletic director or club director of coaching, select the head coach carefully. Select for any leadership position carefully with passion for the task being a primary consideration.
Tuesday
Offside
Still the most misunderstood Law of the Game.
Be sure to watch the video linked at the end of the article! It contains the best, most simple explanation of offside I have found.
Law #11 Offside
First of all a clarification for American's. The correct term is offside, with no "s" on the end. Offsides occurs in American football, not soccer. Offside is probably the most difficult LOTG of soccer for spectators to understand and interpret.
1) An attacking player must be behind the ball OR have two defending players between him and the goal when the ball is played to him.
2) A player cannot be offside on his own half of the field.
That's the simplest explanation I can give.
Complications:
Offside does not have to be called on a player in an offside position. A determination is made by the referee crew if that player is involved with play.
The call of offside is NOT always made immediately upon the ball being played forward to a teammate. The proper technique for the AR and CR is to wait until a play is made on the ball by a player in an offside position. If no play is made on the ball by an atacking player in an offside position, play is not stopped and continues with a defender playing the ball.
Furthermore, you cannot be offside when receiving the ball directly from a thrown-in , on a goal kick in your favor or if you receive a ball directly from a corner kick.
This is a link to an excellent animated explanation of offside. It does a far better job than my written word can do.
http://www.dynamic-thought.com/OffsideClicketteLo.html
Be sure to watch the video linked at the end of the article! It contains the best, most simple explanation of offside I have found.
Law #11 Offside
First of all a clarification for American's. The correct term is offside, with no "s" on the end. Offsides occurs in American football, not soccer. Offside is probably the most difficult LOTG of soccer for spectators to understand and interpret.
1) An attacking player must be behind the ball OR have two defending players between him and the goal when the ball is played to him.
2) A player cannot be offside on his own half of the field.
That's the simplest explanation I can give.
Complications:
Offside does not have to be called on a player in an offside position. A determination is made by the referee crew if that player is involved with play.
The call of offside is NOT always made immediately upon the ball being played forward to a teammate. The proper technique for the AR and CR is to wait until a play is made on the ball by a player in an offside position. If no play is made on the ball by an atacking player in an offside position, play is not stopped and continues with a defender playing the ball.
Furthermore, you cannot be offside when receiving the ball directly from a thrown-in , on a goal kick in your favor or if you receive a ball directly from a corner kick.
This is a link to an excellent animated explanation of offside. It does a far better job than my written word can do.
http://www.dynamic-thought.com/OffsideClicketteLo.html
Soccer Opposites
Was Sir Isaac Newton a football enthusiast?
Newton's Third Law for Motion is that, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This law states that in every interaction, there exists a pair of forces. These forces always come in equal and opposite action-reaction pairs.
Kind of sounds like two teams playing soccer, eh?
Counter Attack Defending the Counter Attack
Newton's Third Law for Motion is that, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This law states that in every interaction, there exists a pair of forces. These forces always come in equal and opposite action-reaction pairs.
Kind of sounds like two teams playing soccer, eh?
Counter Attack Defending the Counter Attack
Safe pass Pressing Defense
Establishing Rhythm Disrupting Rhythm
Transitioning to Attack 6 seconds to regain shape behind ball
Building from the Back Defending at Line of Confrontation
Building in Attacking Half Bunkering in
Attacking Restarts Defending Restarts
Only in soccer, while there are draws, more often than not there is a winner and a loser. The outcome of the match does lie in the battle of opposites. Above we have identified 7 basic opposites in the game of soccer. Perhaps you can identify others? It seems fair to say the team who wins the majority of the battles of opposites has the best chance at winning the match, yes?
How do I get players to stop diving in?
In recent high school games I have watched there seems to be a pandemic of missed tackles as a result of over running plays, stabbing at the ball and diving in when patience is required so I thought I would repost this for the benefit of coaches and players alike.
Diving in or stabbing at the ball is a common mistake made by young or inexperienced soccer players. The defending player, in an attempt to tackle the ball away from an opposing ball carrier, will lunge at the ball. Bad, bad things can happen when defenders do this,
1) They dead leg themselves. That is, when the foot they lunged with hits the ground that leg becomes exploitable by the carrier.
2) The defender turns himself sideways presenting a far smaller obstacle to the ball carrier to deal with.
Diving in or stabbing at the ball is a common mistake made by young or inexperienced soccer players. The defending player, in an attempt to tackle the ball away from an opposing ball carrier, will lunge at the ball. Bad, bad things can happen when defenders do this,
1) They dead leg themselves. That is, when the foot they lunged with hits the ground that leg becomes exploitable by the carrier.
2) The defender turns himself sideways presenting a far smaller obstacle to the ball carrier to deal with.
The Circle Game
I have had a request to share one of the exercises
we use in camps settings. I have never
given it a proper name usually referring to it simply as The Circle Game. This is an
intensely demanding game on every level. With this in mind a proper Introduction is in
order.
The genesis of this exercise grew from a need to
increase the pace or speed of play. I noticed that many of the players we work
with play “one decision soccer”. That
is, the focus is on gaining possession of the ball either by receiving it from
a teammate, intercepting a pass or winning what we call a 50/50 ball. My observation was little thought being given
towards what to do with the ball until after possession was secured. I wanted a
training game that would force players to plan ahead what they would do with
the ball before they received it.
As coaches are want to do, I poached the general
idea behind this game from something I saw presented at a coaching clinic. The premise of the clinic presentation was
increasing the speed of play by forcing players out of their comfort zone. The clinician speeded up the physical aspects
of play under the assumption the mental, psychological, technical and tactical
facets of play would follow along.
Monday
The Process
The process of reaching our goals takes place every day.
The process is taking place when working on your own,
The process is taking place when working on your own,
in every practice and during every game.
The process is taking place at every meal
The process is taking place at every meal
and in the amount of rest we get each night.
We cannot allow ourselves to become bored with the process.
Ultimately the quality of our performance,
We cannot allow ourselves to become bored with the process.
Ultimately the quality of our performance,
our ability to achieve the goals we have set,
will be determined by
the attention paid to the details within the process.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)